The Climate Change Hoax

First off, I don't get my beliefs from Rush. I held these beliefs long before I ever heard of Rush Limbaugh. I was very happy to learn some 20 years ago that somebody in the media finally started saying the things I believed, after a long drought with only liberal views getting any air time. I am also too old and sick to give a rat's *** about whatever demeaning terms you wish to lay on me. So say what you want. I don't care. This snake oil plot has finally become unmasked and I couldn't be happier. Your stack of documentation may be higher, but with the tainted data it may contain, its credibility may be in doubt. All data is now suspect and all scientists have been smeared by this brush even if they were uninvolved in any fraud whatsoever. It is too bad, really.

 

When thousands, possibly millions, of people vote based on what Rush Limbaugh says, he's much more than an entertainer. That's his weasel route anytime he gets cornered, though. "Hey. I don't run the country; I just entertain people."

I'm a little baffled that you would classify him as a comedian. Apparently you don't listen to him. Although he often uses humor to make his points, he isn't doing a comedy act. He's doing dead serious political propaganda, hour after hour, day after day.

And yes, people do take this seriously. So seriously that a couple of Republican national figures who said disparaging things about Rush Limbaugh earlier this year wound up making abject public apologies, to calm down Rush's followers (not his 'fans').

When he rallies massive numbers of people in opposition to the theory of climate change and sics them on their Congressmen, Senators and other government figures, he's having a serious affect on the debate--which extends beyond whether it's valid, into what our country is going to do or not do about it.

Fortunately, his power is dropping over time. Ten years ago, he had 20 million listeners a week instead of 12 or 13 million, and I think a much higher percentage of them blindly believed whatever he told them. He was a major factor in Bush winning the Republican nomination in 2000 against McCain; his attacks on McCain during that primary were breathtakingly vicious.

In contrast, Rush had little impact on the Republican primary last year--probably because he had tied himself too tightly to Bush, and never quite managed to cut the painter. But he can't be ignored as a political force, and political considerations can't be ignored in the scientific debate over climate change and what to do about it.

 

You're working very hard to take this discussion personally, hoytedow. You don't need to, and I think you should relax a little.

 

A good friend here lives on a main street, lots of traffic , 24 / 7.

She told me she was fed up with washing black , greasy , diesel "crud" off everything outside her house, and now on window sills INSIDE her home..
She`s selling up .Wants to move to " somewhere cleaner ".

Weather climate change does exist or not, and there is certainly NO proof it doesn`t ,
what right have you " hoaxists" to gamble with my children`s future?

While she`s scrubbing her house ,I guess that`s just another " hoax " she`s spreading.
Rub your faces in it ...look in the mirror ....what will you see ? ...no matter , just call it a " hoax "...

 

For each dollar spent on "skeptical" research/education/propaganda or whatever you want to call it, more than $3000.00 is now spent on the pro-AGW research/education/propaganda.

Indeed, follow the money.

 

Soot and CO2 emissions are unrelated phenomena. Gasoline engines make far less soot than diesels, but diesels consume less fuel overall. Soot is unarguably a pollutant while CO2 is not a pollutant at any emission rate possible by the burning of fossil fuels. Burning all the fossil fuel in existence could not have caused the rise in atmospheric CO2 levels from 280- 380 ppm; it's just physically impossible given the equilibrium concentration (described by Henry's law) of atmospheric/ocean CO2. But burning fossil fuels does create other harmful emissions that affect the area where the emissions occur, like a big city.

Jimbo

 

Unrelated ? you cannot produce one ( soot ) without the other.(co2 )(It`s called combustion.)

Do you actually know how much fossil fuel is in existence ? My guess would be no. Be that as it may ,the question one should ask is :

WHO ACTUALLY KNOWS AND CAN PROVE that those figures are the " benchmark" for concern ? ( 280 - 380 ppm co2 levels)

The answer is ..................NOBODY !

Burning fossil fuels ALSO creates harmful emissions , that affect all areas where the emissions occur. Period.
NOT only big cities.

I wished this was not fact but it is .

Who has the right to gamble with MY children`s future ? Certainly not some hoaxist , or "hoax conspiracy" ******.
We have a responsibility to our children.If there is ANY doubt about the existence of global warming ,
we are negligent of our responsibilities , if we don`t act with apprehension and caution about polluting.
With any pollutant , by any means.

Conspiracy this , hoax that ......... absurd .Anyone who believes this trivia is the issue either has no children , or is a negligent irresponsible parent.
We owe them more than bickering over ********.

 

Jon Stewart is also doing dead serious political propoganda, day after day. He was credited a great deal with the comeback of the Democratic party. Yet I classify Stewart as a comedian. Sure, Limbaugh isn't as funny as Stewart but it isn't because he's not trying to be. And Limbaugh is no more concerned about the political implications of his work than Stewart is, or some of the people on SNL, or many other TV writers and producers. Many of them, probably the majority have political agendas that they try to push in their shows. The only reason Limbaugh stands out is that he's unusually successful and he is at the opposite of the political spectrum from most of the other successful politically-active entertainers.

 

Boat fan,


Of what significance is it if all the automobiles in the whole world make X tons of CO2 while the oceans make 1500X tons at the same time? Do you think the atmosphere treats oceanic CO2 differently from automotive?

Talk about absurd!

 

Sorry, that is DEFINITELY Not proven .

Mr McElroy does not seem to agree with your claims , to be sure......You smell a rat.....hoax !

Is he right ? Is he wrong ? Do YOU know ? I don`t believe you do.

Can you prove your position ? Certainly not.

Agassiz professor of biological oceanography James McCarthy.

Oh dear , Mr McCarthy seems to disagree with you too. Therefore , he is probably also an alarmist conspirator , right ?

To be perfectly honest , I actually wish you could PROVE your case.
It would be a great relief to me , if you could.
We would be off the hook.

Back to reality : Nobody really knows.

We do not have the right to gamble.

 

No. Rush stands out because he's a political agitator first, and an entertainer second, whose primary goal is to influence people's political beliefs. His 'act' has almost nothing in common with Jon Stewart's, as far as I can see. Stewart is an entertainer first and a political activist second. He ranges far wider than Rush, who relates every subject to his particular brand of conservative politics, and shills quite openly for the Republican Party.

Rush is a throwback to Father Coughlin, the Catholic priest from the thirties who's known as "the father of hate radio." To quote Wikipedia, "Coughlin is often credited as one of the major demagogues of the 20th century for being able to influence politics through broadcasting, without actually holding a political office himself."

Similarly, Rush's goal is to wield political power, without holding office himself and actually having any responsibility or accountability. He used to make sense to me some of the time, but in the last few years he's become an outlandish parody of his old self.

The final word on him comes from my wife's 90 year old Aunt Loretta, who spent her life on Texas ranches and isn't exactly a bleeding-heart liberal. She surprised me one day by inserting herself into a conversation, which she rarely does, and this is what she said: "are you folks talkin' about that Rush feller? I don't listen to him no more. I used to think he knowed what he was talkin' about, but he don't; he's jest hateful."

 

This mind-reading ability of yours must be great for picking up chicks. Me, I just assume that someone who is getting rich doing a radio show has the goal of getting rich doing a radio show. But obviously I don't have your powers of mind reading.

Stewart shills quite openly for the Democratic Party. As to the wider range, I have no idea what you mean unless you are referring to comedic talent. Stewart is clearly just as much of a partisan as Limbaugh is.

"often credited" sounds like "Democrats hated him". That isn't a bad mark in my book. Plenty of Democrats hate me and I'm a sweet guy.

These sort of anecdotes would be more persuasive if accompanied with actual hateful things that Rush has said. For someone who is so often accused of being hateful, it is remarkable how hard it is to find things that are really hateful (as opposed to things that just piss off Democrats). This is the advantage of your side controlling the mass media. You can just say over and over how hateful someone is, and eventually people start to believe it just because it gets said so much.

To be more convincing, why don't you make up some more racist quotes and attribute them to Limbaugh? Recent history shows that the press will immediately repeat your slanders without checking, and when they find out that Rush didn't actually say those things, they will just say, "Sorry, but even if he didn't say it, he thinks it."

It's so easy to find the bad guys when you can read minds. I wish I could do that.

 

All your 'points' have been addressed in the most minute detail in the other thread. Suffice it to say, all these assertions are easily disprovable CRAP. The residence time of CO2 is short; this ABSOLUTELY is provable. The oceans convert CO2 to carbonate mineral; this is provable. The rate of oceanic CO2 fluxing (turnover) has not fallen (if anything it has increased recently); this is provable. The natural world (mostly the oceans) fluxes ~150 billion tons of CO2 from the atmosphere annually; this is deduced from the above. Humans make ~8 billion tons annually (we keep measurements ). The atmosphere contains ~750 billion tons of CO2 while the oceans contain ~38, 000 billion tons of CO2 (as dissolved gaseous CO2, not counting carbonates), all quite provable. In this context our 8 billion tons is just not of much consequence.

The only mystery is why anyone would continue to believe that it is.

Cite a residence study that proves that atmospheric CO2 has a long residence time. You can't because no such study exists.

 

What was it my junior high science teacher told us? " when you assume, you make an *** of u and me." The fact that someone is getting rich doing what he does hardly means that is his only reason for doing it.

To put it bluntly, you're obviously completely ignorant concerning Father Coughlin. Do a little research and find out why he's known as 'the father of hate radio,' before you spout off again.

It's hard to actually find hateful things Rush has said!?!?! Tell me: did you bother to keep a straight face while you typed that?

"You put your kids on a school bus you expect safety but in Obama's America the white kids now get beat up with the black kids cheering 'yeah, right on, right on, right on.' Of course everybody said the white kid deserved it he was born a racist, he's white."

Let's see: hateful.....check. Racist....check. Ignorant and/or deceitful....check (the fight had nothing to do with race). I rest my case.

It took me less than thirty seconds to find that. I can bring 'em up by the bushel if I want to, because I listen to him enough to know what he says. But it's probably pointless. You seem to be a pretty typical ditto head; little things like facts aren't going to sway you.

And a final parting point: I don't need to read Rush's mind. All I have to do is listen to what comes out of the mouth that's hooked up directly to that mind....Good night.